INTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE REHABILITATION COUNCIL Volume …2)F.pdf · public concerns over animal welfare. “These two organizations have been long-time adversaries, but we’re excited

INTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE REHABILITATION COUNCIL

Volume 36, Number 2, 2016 REHABILITATION

j o u r n a l o fWILDLIFE

IN THIS ISSUE: Case Study: Diabetes mellitus treatment with prednisolone in a koala...

A US survey of specific enrichment effectiveness in rehabilitating and captive owls...

Celebrating one hundred years of legal migratory bird protection

http://www.theiwrc.org

https://www.flickr.com/photos/midgley/6368611453/in/photolist-aGLNiK-7w1GDh-4bkVJj-3qVtQ-2Y9Qp-e5EfuL-e4PVR2-7kMAG-aBeL2-4wjgwC-5ctRRc-93C5NR-aaFe7a-8cf9BX-6D8zAw-aGMUYB-fycYz-xku7M-A9z1E-58kR2s-cHJXX-9W7htU-sEwsHC-bzipv-9fb8Bz-4jfxL1-f6CMb-71sGu3-4bgUAX-7vXx2F-ARF8-7ADavJ-3ntB3Q-4jfy85-3dwCFT-hHpzLd-at4jnw-cHK4M-a9Uevi-5eAoAz-EuUny-4FstYC-5tpSrd-at4jq7-aNbud-3np7Kv-c1CAkJ-2jUAw-8dU5h2-4drNeh

International Wildlife Rehabilitation Council

PO Box 3197Eugene, OR 97403 USAPhone: 866.871.1869

Fax: 408.876.6153Toll free: 866. 871.1869

Email: [email protected]@theiwrc.org

www.theiwrc.org

ABOUT THE JOURNAL

On the cover: Koala pair (Phascolarctos cinereus).PHOTO © ADRIAN MIDGLEY, FLICKR. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 LICENSE.

THE Journal of Wildlife Rehabilitation is designed to provide useful information to wildlife

rehabilitators and others involved in the care and treatment of native wild species with the

ultimate purpose of returning them to the wild. The journal

is published by the International Wildlife Rehabilitation Council (IWRC), which invites your

comments on this issue. Through this publication, rehabilitation courses offered online and

on-site in numerous locations, and its outreach to those in the profession, the IWRC works

to disseminate information and improve the quality of the care provided to wildlife.

Left: Young Iberian wolf (Canis lupus signatus).PHOTO ©MICHELLE BENDER, FLICKR. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 LICENSE.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/andymorffew/15785277160/in/photolist-q3TEX3-wWiRcF-cqZKqW-fP4oes-qiQXvA-wDaBqC-w1jUu7-ffJ5xQ-wJq39Q-cy43Uu-dKTEKm-pF131k-qga4qv-pJqBcR-4pkbkV-poAR2U-9vmnX2-uNc8ik-wEJnbq-aeRXMQ-poyotW-7fGmyR-gAQE8Z-djfBRQ-poy2Zu-diWRNN-cbZEdh-8GmMBx-wXSVsH-8aX5zn-8FRH9E-rgYtoc-4UZrwC-4TUreD-dXexCf-7o9FqF-wJq3i7-jLfgUe-iXLsoF-asxh7w-8FNpW2-dcQuLP-8FNtkK-bHrrRc-w51wY3-x1hjn3-4mv4Fd-7h49Mb-hF57GS-dYuWHS

https://www.flickr.com/photos/omegaequalsone/14840205607/in/photolist-oBnW6V-7ojGKh-ay6uZD-ay9dn1-ay6v3M-6NdgHh-nZYs2Q-dnMvLx-dnMvqX-dnMAnU-pLVsoH-6kqabr-7gupvX-pmqo1y-dVARNH-gr4u8c-6kqa1K-gr4T3b-6kuk8G-eDF6i8-dV6iBP-o6ratZ-5rgVdJ-6oHbHK-xVBbH-dw69GX-qyWdch-fMR5AS-dsDfJz-dsDqds-dsDgen-78uQ5y-5eg5i-3bZ8J5-cQjpdY-5aPX9t-dzqc6C-55mzsk-55qHS7-55qKou-2JWM4U-3p9i3m-3tM91S-3tMo8Y-3tGMC2-3tGx7Z-5Aa4Q-5eg4e-55qrAQ-cPpL29



https://www.flickr.com/photos/-mbender/8228442534/in/photolist-dx7VhS-98R8pz-dx2tzt-gXsdbf-cjcPMC-dsxvWd-gXrTwH-gXrYbc-98Urnv-ekD93C-awg3Jo-DjZ5EL-gXj6tT-q2GTM5-98UrWK-xmr3Fo-gXt6QM-gXscPW-DsirfP-gXs56j-gXtbQg-gXsdMN-ookKPL-gXi8Ej-gXt1Er-zVYE9u-jbigCj-wGb4ne-gXs8Hj-gXrZCE-Dn3bGm-gXs2Mk-xmr5zm-gXi6Es-qn5rBx-xDEmPv-CrY3Jv-xvkGpW-uXNq49-Dh5xkM-nUQVzv-o8M1XQ-a2qKKr-rvLRFz-oavRb8-nTjWSy-8wC8ae-oaPicM-9qNJV9-9qKKkP

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bald_eagle#/media/File:Bald_Eagle_Portrait.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bald_eagle#/media/File:Bald_Eagle_Portrait.jpg

Volume 36 (2) 3

The Journal of Wildlife Rehabilitation is published by the International Wildlife Rehabilitation Council (IWRC), PO Box 3197, Eugene, OR 97403 USA. ©2016 (ISSN: 2166-9198). All rights reserved.

C O N T E N T S

PEER-REVIEWED PAPERS

7

Case study: Iatrogenic diabetes mellitus in a koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) receiving treatment with prednisoloneSheridan E. Lathe, BVSc

11

Captive enrichment for owls (Strigiformes)Aurora Potts

DEPARTMENTS

Editorial 4

In the News 5

Selected Abstracts 30

Tail Ends 34

Submission Guidelines 35

Volume 36(2)

EditorKieran J. Lindsey, PhD

Center for Leadership in Global SustainabilityVirginia Tech University

JWR Editorial office: St. Louis, Missouri, USAArt Director

Nancy HawekotteCumulus Creative

Art offices: Omaha, Nebraska, USACopy Editor

Heila HubbardFinaleyes, Ink

Rescue, California, USA

REHABILITATION

j o u r n a l o fWILDLIFEProviding science-based education

and resources on wildlife rehabilitation

to promote wildlife conservation

and welfare worldwide.


BOARD OF DIREC TORS

PresidentSusan WylieLe Nichoir Wild Bird Rehabilitation CentreHudson, Quebec, Canada

Vice PresidentAdam GroganRSPCAHorsham, West Sussex, UK

SecretaryBrenda HarmsPelham, New York, USA

TreasurerDani NicholsonWillow Tree WildlifeCayucos, CA, USA

Francisca Astorga, MVCascada de las Animas Wild Animal RefugeSantiago, RM, Chile

Lloyd BrownWildlife Rescue of Dade CountyMiami, Florida, USA

Amanda CyrWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesWausau, Wisconsin, USA

Kelly DonithanAnimals Asia Hanoi, Vietnam

Kristen Heitman, CWRProvidence Wildlife RehabilitationWestfield, Indiana, USA

Laurin HuseCascades Raptor CenterEugene, Oregon, USA

Ashraf NVKWildlife Trust of IndiaNoida, Uttar Pradesh, India

Kim PoissonA2 Raptor RescueAnn Arbor, Michigan, USA

Kai WilliamsExecutive Director

Julissa FavelaPrograms and Membership Manager

Laura RattiOffice Administrator

I W R C

4 Journal of Wildlife Rehabilitation

E D I T O R I A L

275 w/col (1/3p)

Celebrating Our International Duty of Wildlife Rehabilitation

This year marks the 100th anniversary of the Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds, signed August 16, 1916, by the US and Great Britain (on behalf of Canada). Over the course of the 20th cen-tury, birds who spent part of their migra-tory travels in North America were given federal protection by the US, Canada, Mexico, Japan, Russia, and many South and Central American governments. Looking back from 2016, that first treaty was a watershed moment for the interna-tional protection of all wildlife, not just for birds that crossed the 49th parallel. It is part of our wildlife rehabilitation history.

History1916 Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds, between the US and Canada1936 Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds and Game Animals, between Mexico and the US 1940 Western Hemisphere Convention, a multilateral treaty by 17 American countries 1972 Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds and Birds in Danger of Extinction and Their Environment, between the US and Japan1976 Convention Concerning the Con-servation of Migratory Birds and Their Environment, between the US and the former USSR 1979 Bonn Convention on Migratory Spe-cies (CMS), among 122 countries

Treaties and rehabilitatorsAvian rehabilitation in the US is governed by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and in Canada by the Migratory Birds Conven-tion Act; both acts were created to carry out the agreements made in the 1916 Convention. Wildlife rehabilitation, in North America at least, owes a direct debt to the 1916 Convention for the parameters governing our care for birds. Other treaties

may be equally important to other coun-tries practice of wildlife rehabilitation—in Chile, the CMS provides a framework for care and capture of migratory species.

International treaties are a tool to pro-tect wildlife; what we sometimes forget is that they apply not just to sovereign nations, but to individual citizens, companies, and nongovernmental organizations, be they international like IWRC or local.

Migration and rehabilitationMigration is a fact of life for species as diverse as hummingbirds, wildebeest, and sea turtles. We would be poor rehabilita-tors indeed if we didn’t take migration into account in wildlife care and management—especially as it pertains to release criteria: when, where, and the critical suitability of a release site. Wildlife rehabilitators protect animals all along migratory routes; we must communicate and share resources to ensure that Swainson’s hawks are still seen on the pampas of Argentina and the Taiga plains of Canada, and snow leopards exist in moun-tainous regions from Pakistan to Tajikistan.

According to the Fish & Wildlife Service, “International cooperation among governments, NGOs, and other stakehold-ers is required along the entire flyway and throughout the entire life cycle of a species to share knowledge and to coordinate conservation efforts.”

International migratory protections have come a long way, and have a ways still to go. But it all began 100 years ago with that first treaty. The Migratory Bird Treaty Centennial is an opportunity to engage the public to increase knowledge of and support for conservation programs and promote everyday actions for wildlife conservation around the world.Reference: www.fws.gov/birds/MBTreaty100/messages.php

—Kai WilliamsExecutive Director

Volume 36 (2) 5

I N T H E N E W S

275 w/col (1/3p)

Landmark SeaWorld Policy ShiftsWashington, DC (March 17)—In a dra-matic shift that signals an eventual end to the practice of keeping captive orcas for public exhibition, SeaWorld announced it would cease all of its orca breeding pro-grams for the company’s nearly 30 whales. This action will make the current group the last generation of SeaWorld’s orcas. The Humane Society of the United States, which worked with SeaWorld on these new policies, praised its reforms as a major step forward toward a humane economy in which corporations respond and adapt to public concerns over animal welfare.

“These two organizations have been long-time adversaries, but we’re excited now to see the company transforming its operations for the better on animal wel-fare,” said Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of The HSUS. “Today’s announce-ment signals that the era of captive display of orcas will end and that SeaWorld will redouble its work around rescue and reha-bilitation of marine mammals in crisis and partner with us to tackle global threats to marine creatures.”

“SeaWorld takes seriously its respon-sibility to preserve marine wildlife. As one of the largest rescue organizations in the world, we will increase our focus on rescue operations so that the thousands of stranded marine mammals like dolphins and sea lions that cannot be released back to the wild will have a place to go,” said Joel Manby, president and CEO of SeaWorld.“This is a defining moment. The fact that SeaWorld is doing away with orca breed-ing marks truly meaningful change,” said Gabriela Cowperthwaite, director of Blackfish.

Through collaboration or confronta-tion, and sometimes a combination of the two, The HSUS has worked in recent years to secure substantial animal welfare commitments from companies working within food and agriculture, cosmetics and chemical manufacturing, fashion, the pet industry, animals in entertainment, and other sectors. In addition to its new

policies for orcas, SeaWorld has commit-ted to maximizing its focus on rescue and rehabilitation of marine animals in distress and highlighting the plight of unreleasable animals to foster a stronger bond between humans and animals and to educate people about ongoing threats to these animals.

Record-breaking HeatSilver Spring, MD, USA (March 17)—Record warmth across the globe was aided by a strong El Niño that peaked during the winter. The average temperature for the globe during December-February was 2.03°F above the 20th century aver-age according to scientists from NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Infor-mation. This was the highest temperature for December-February in the 1880-2016 record, surpassing the previous record set in 2015/16 by 0.52°F. This also marks the highest 3-month departure from average for any 3-month period on record, surpass-

ing the previous record set last month, November 2015-January 2016, by 0.16°F.The February average temperature for the globe was 2.18°F above the 20th century average. This was not only the highest for the month of February in the 1880-2016 record (surpassing the previous record set in 2015 by 0.59°F ), but it surpassed the all-time monthly record set just two months ago in December 2015 by 0.16°F. Febru-ary 2016 also marks the 10th consecutive month a monthly global temperature record has been broken.

Transportation Industry Getting Serious about Wildlife TraffickingLondon (March 15)—The signing of a new declaration at Buckingham Palace committing global transportation industry leaders to major steps in fighting criminal wildlife trafficking has been hailed by The Duke of Cambridge as “a game changer in the race against extinction.”

I N M E M O R I U M

Deb Sheaffer (July 5, 2016)

Deb Sheaffer, Portland Audubon’s Wildlife Veterinarian, passed away on July 5, just a month after she learned that the cancer she had battled so bravely last summer had returned. She is survived by her husband Ron, her children Nate and Mary.

Deb volunteered at the Wildlife Care Center in the early 1990s and became its first staff veterinarian and operations manager in 2003. She was a vital part of the community. In recent years, she and Lacy Campbell co-managed the Center.

In the 1990s, when Portland Audubon depended on local veterinarians to donate their skills, Deb was always game, whether called on late at night, facing an outrageous adventure, or treating an animal oth-ers might decline.

During her time on staff, Deb treated more than 30,000 wild animals, mentored hundreds of volunteers, and answered tens of thousands of wildlife questions from the public. She taught Junior Wildlife Camps and presented research on lead toxicity and wildlife diseases at conferences. According to Director Bob Sallinger, “...she was a healer, a teacher, a mentor, and a warrior in the fight to save our imperiled planet. She will live on in all the people she touched, all the love she put into the Center, and all the wild birds she put back into the sky.”

In lieu of flowers, the family has requested that donations in honor of Deb be made to Portland Audubon’s Wildlife Care Center. You can also see Deb here, in an OPB story on the Wildlife Care Center.

Volume 36 (2) 5

https://secure.humanesociety.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=7173&autologin=true&s_src=mr_031616_web_id722154005

http://blog.humanesociety.org/wayne/2016/03/seaworld-to-end-orca-breeding.html?credit=mr_031716_web_id722154005

https://www.climate.gov/enso

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/

https://secure.acceptiva.com/?cst=689ad5

http://audubonportland.org/news/remembering-deb

http://audubonportland.org/news/remembering-deb


Forty CEOs, chairmen, and other leaders of airlines, shipping firms, port operators, customs agencies, intergovern-mental organizations and conservation charities from around the world have become the founding signatories of the Declaration of the United for Wildlife International Taskforce on the Transporta-tion of Illegal Wildlife Products.

The Buckingham Palace Declaration is the result of a year’s worth of meetings, research, and coalition building by the United for Wildlife Transport Taskforce, with industry representatives including companies and organizations based in China, the USA, the UAE, Kenya, the UK, and Denmark.

The Buckingham Palace Declaration commits signatories to eleven commit-ments that will raise industry standards to prevent traffickers from exploiting weak-nesses as they move their products from killing field to marketplace. The commit-ments focus on information sharing, staff training, technological improvements, and resource sharing across companies and organizations worldwide, as well

as assistance to those in nations who are in need of expertise and new systems.

The work of the United for Wildlife Transport Taskforce has been strongly sup-ported not only by the transport sector but by a number of intergovernmental agencies including the World Customs Organisa-tion, the United Nations Development Programme, and the Convention on Illegal Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES)—the world’s regulatory instrument on trade in endangered species.

The commitments in the Buckingham Palace Declaration include:

n Developing information-sharing systems for the transport industry to receive credible information about high-risk

routes and methods of transportation,n Supporting a secure system for pas-

sing information about suspected illegal wildlife trade from the transport sector to relevant customs and law enforcement authorities, and

n Notifying relevant law enforcement authorities of cargoes suspected of containing illegal wildlife and their products and, where able, refusing to accept or ship such cargoes.

United for Wildlife, the global coali-tion of conservation organizations of which The Duke of Cambridge is presi-dent, will focus on implementation.

World Wildlife Fund Reports That Lack of Government Support Affects Wildlife Ranger SafetyKuala Lumpur, Malaysia (March 3)—The men and women who protect the planet’s wildlife feel they lack support from governments to enable them to do their jobs safely, according to the results of an Asia-based survey released on World Wildlife Day.

The survey included 530 rangers across 11 tiger range countries and found that 63 percent had faced a life-threatening situa-tion, 74 percent felt they were ill-equipped, and 48 percent felt they lacked adequate training. Surveys from other regions will be released in the coming months.

“It’s a dangerous job and bravery is not enough,” said Rohit Singh, president of the Ranger Federation of Asia (RFA) and WWF Enforcement Specialist. “Poaching is at critical levels across Asia and these heroic men and women must have the necessary tools and training to do their job safely and successfully.”

The survey also found that many rang-ers have a poor work/life balance, with 45 percent of rangers seeing their families for less than five days a month, while 30 percent of rangers ranked low or irregular pay as one of the worst aspects of their jobs.

Rangers are the first line of defense for the world’s endangered species, many of which are threatened by the unprecedented surge in wildlife crime. The current global poaching crisis is increasingly driven by international organized criminal networks, which increase the risk of violence and danger for rangers.

The aim of the survey is to provide a snapshot of ranger working conditions and gain insight into the factors that affect the motivation of rangers. Similar surveys are underway across Africa and South Amer-ica. These will be followed by in-depth reports on working condition indicators (pay, hours worked, access to equipment,

A newly hatched bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii) with its egg sac still attached. Past Illegal wildlife (pet) trade is one factor in this US species’ IUCN status as “criti-cally endangered.”

PHO

TO ©

NRO

SIE

WA

LUN

AS/

USF

WS.

CC

BY-

NC

-ND

2.0

LIC

ENSE

.

CONTINUED ON PAGE 31

https://www.flickr.com/photos/usfwsnortheast/4924259588/in/photolist-8v97Po-hE5oza-qG2Pgj-qYvxM3-q2A4Pw-5XKrig-k3vBaH-k3tuz2-k3JLiX-k2vCLV-k2wf6a-k3VoyT-k2wexB-k2vCDF-k3jVK8-k3vKHn-k2y1Am-k3u98B-k2y1xq-k3yJpL-k3v6D8-k2vDaF-k3uvPT-k3yJvN-fp2Wd8-fphc71-cuYurY-fp2VAZ-bpp7p4-k3HkWS-k3XQjf-k3wjRY-k2y1Lw-k2vCyk-k3tS6t-k3v6qc-eFbV4s-hP4SWX-6fqdUR-hP4ZqQ-2beJXw-6fusyw-6fqdUD-6fqdUi-6fqdUH-4TeeAa-6fqdUe-hP4QWg-6fqdUz-bsmrSQ



Volume 36 (2) 7

J. Wildlife Rehab. 36(2): 7-10. © 2016 Inter-national Wildlife Rehabilitation Council.

ABSTRACT: Diabetes mellitus is a well recognized condition in human and veterinary medicine that can be induced by the administration of glucocorticoids. Prednisolone is a glucocorticoid used to treat inflammation in koalas (Phascolarc-tos cinereus). A free-living koala from the South Australian Mount Lofty Ranges population received treatment with pred-nisolone for the treatment of pruritis and skin inflammation. Clinical signs of diabetes mellitus developed in this koala during treatment with prednisolone and resolved after cessation of treatment.

KEY WORDS: Australia, diabetes, iatro-genic diabetes mellitus, koala, prednisolone

CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Sheridan E. Lathe, BVScAdelaide Koala and Wildlife Hospital282 Anzac HighwayPlympton, SA 5038AustraliaEmail: [email protected]

W I L D L I F E R E H A B I L I TAT I O N A N D M E D I C I N E

IntroductionA two-year-old, free-living female koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) was presented at the Adelaide Koala and Wildlife Hospital (Plympton, Adelaide, South Australia) in March 2015 with pruritic and exudative dermatitis of the chin, ventrum, and forelimbs associ-ated with excessive salivation and wetting of the fur. A physical examination was carried out under sedation and no cause was found for the excessive salivation. An impression smear from affected skin revealed a mixed infection of Malassezia species and unidentified gram positive cocci. The animal subsequently developed clinical symptoms of diabetes mellitus while being treated with prednisolone, which is used in the treatment of koalas at a number of facilities in Australia to control inflammation associated with cystitis and skin conditions.

Case study: Iatrogenic diabetes mellitus in a koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) receiving treatment with prednisoloneSheridan E. Lathe

PHO

TO ©

ZO

E SH

UTT

LEW

ORT

H. C

C B

Y-N

C-N

D 2

.0 L

ICEN

SE.

Volume 36 (2) 7

https://www.flickr.com/photos/zoeshuttleworth/4483834456/in/photolist-7QdPLC-69n45b-x2wUwq-pg1DZz-aB2Zkh-9YPrhh-628fE3-8Rhtqt-A1y8d-kXH1a-a5uFyV-FvQKJ-FGimR-5f8feT-5HcQvT-54KqsG-pGfbhV-5E9zWE-8f5pd1-7WpgC4-5f8gar-4Fsniw-mnX3dV-vjK39-4wK62Z-5HcQPD-2YATq-fycWE-yPGW3g-yx68pC-yNHxYC-yx69qq-yMoCcL-wvqm5-yPGZTT-yMoBGC-3fg1X-yx6cSq-a1KHDQ-yNHCqy-fBeeB-3aLBbA-qmsBEU-qmAtLP-a1KHy3-5f8f6R-a1KHLw-3kR9c-t89sX-tQYUXA

Diabetes mellitus is a metabolic disease characteried by insulin deficiency or resistance, resulting in hyperglycemia.1 Two cases of diabetes mellitus have been described in koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus),2,3 however, pathogenesis could not be determined definitively in either case. Steroid-induced diabetes mellitus is a well-recognized syndrome in human medicine4 and has also been described in feline medicine in detail.1 Glucocorticoids have been documented in causing insulin resistance by a variety of mechanisms.4,1 These mechanisms include the inhibition of glucose transport in skeletal muscle, the suppression of insulin secretion by pancreatic beta cells, and interference with insulin signalling pathways.4,1

MethodsOral trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMS) (Bactrim®, Mutual Pharm, USA) suspension was started at 15 mg/kg twice daily to control bacterial infection. Oral nystatin (Nilstat®, Aspen Pharm, AUS) was started at 50,000 IU/kg twice daily to control fungal infection. Oral prednisolone (Redipred®, Aspen Pharm, AUS) was started at 0.5 mg/kg twice daily to control pruritis. On day one during the initial examination, the koala’s blood glucose concentration was 4.82 mmol/L (ref: 2.7–7.2 mmol/L).5

A urinalysis performed on day three of treatment did not iden-tify glucosuria. Urinalysis was repeated on day seven of treatment and identified glucose in the koala’s urine. Urinalysis results were obtained from free catch samples that had been in contact with concrete flooring or litter trays. A drop of urine was placed onto the glucose test square of a Seimens Multistix urine dipstick and the glucose was read at 60 seconds.

A blood sample was collected that identified the koala’s blood glucose concentration was 20.01 mmol/L. This prompted regular blood glucose readings, with blood glucose concentrations remain-ing above 17 mmol/L for the next seven days. Whole blood was taken on days one, seven, and eight from the cephalic vein using a 22 g needle and 3 ml syringe. The whole blood was placed into a lithium heparin tube and centrifuged. The serum was separated and the blood glucose level determined using the IDEXX VetTest 8008® Chemistry Analyzer (IDEXX, USA). Due to difficulty with blood draws in conscious koalas, daily sampling was not always possible but was attempted. Smaller whole blood samples were taken from the cephalic vein using a 22 g needle and 1 ml syringe on subsequent days due to difficulty obtaining enough blood volume to run in the IDEXX VetTest 8008 Chemistry Analyzer. These blood samples were read using OneTouch Veri-oIQ® Glucometer (LifeScan Europe, Switzerland).

Treatment with prednisolone was ceased on day 13. Six days after cessation of treatment with prednisolone, the blood glucose level declined to 1.2 mmol/L. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and nystatin treatment were continued during this time.

Table 1 presents the blood glucose levels measured during treatment and the corresponding dose of prednisolone. The blood glucose concentrations became elevated between day one and day seven of treatment and fall to below normal range between day two and day six after the cessation of oral prednisolone.

DiscussionA variety of clinical signs were observed during the koala’s treat-ment period, some of which could be attributed to diabetes mel-litus. During the koala’s time in the hospital, she was observed to have progressive weight loss, polydipsia, and lethargy. The koala weighed 4.5 kg on admission to the hospital and was 3.7 kg at the end of her treatment. Complete blood counts and serum bio-chemistry were run on day one and day seven of treatment with all values within the normal range, with the exception of blood glucose concentrations. An endoscopic examination of the oral cavity, trachea, and esophagus was conducted under anesthetic on day eight of treatment to diagnose a cause for the excessive salivation; no abnormalities were detected.

Although the koala did have improvements in skin condition during her treatment, the excessive salivation remained and weight loss continued. After a month of treatments with deteriorating condition, the decision was made to euthanize the koala.

A postmortem examination was performed immediately after euthanasia. No gross abnormalities were noted, with the excep-tion of poor body and coat condition. Samples were taken of the

DAY OF PREDNISOLONE BLOOD GLUCOSETREATMENT ADMINISTERED (MMOL/L) (DOSE RATE: 0.5 MG/KG)

1 Twice 4.82

2 Twice

3 Twice

4 Once

5 Once

6 Once

7 Once 20.01

8 Once 21.02

9 Once

10 -

11 Once 22.9

12 - 19.8

13 Ceased treatment 20.3

14 - 20.1

15 -

16 -

17 -

18 -

19 - 1.2

20 - 1.2

TABLE 1. PREDNISOLONE DOSE AND CORRESPONDING BLOOD GLUCOSE LEVELS.


Volume 36 (2) 9

pancreas and adrenal gland and sent to IDEXX laboratories for histo-pathological examination. Both the pancreas and adrenal gland were histologically normal. Type 1 human diabetes and canine diabetes display histological changes of the pancreas, including insulitis, inflammation, and a reduction or degeneration of beta cells.6 The normal histological structure of the pancreas in this case suggests there was no auto-immune involvement in the development of diabetes, making it likely that the prednisolone reduced insulin secretion, caused insulin resistance leading to the manifestation of diabetes mellitus, or both. Changes in blood glucose concentra-tions are not reported with the use of nystatin. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole has been associated with hypoglycemia, but a study in human diabetic patients showed no increases in blood glucose concentrations with its use.7

The limitations of this study include the inability to obtain regular blood samples due to patient compliance, staff availability, and technical skills of staff. Further testing such as insulin assays, fructosamine assays, and histopathological analysis of additional organs was not performed due to cost limitations.

Management implicationsSteroid induced diabetes mellitus in the koala has not previously been reported. Clinical signs of diabetes mellitus developed in this koala during treatment with prednisolone and resolved after cessation of treatment. Steroid-induced diabetes mellitus may be a clinical syndrome currently going unrecognized in koalas receiv-ing treatment with glucocorticoids. This case study suggests koalas may have a susceptibility to developing diabetes mellitus while receiving treatment with prednisolone, and the use of medium- to long-term glucocorticoid treatment should be approached with caution. If the use of glucocorticoid treatment is deemed necessary, regular blood glucose analysis and urinalysis should be performed.

About the AuthorDr. Sheridan Lathe worked as the head veterinarian for the Adelaide Koala and Wildlife Hospital in 2014 and 2015. During that time, the hospital treated over 1500 cases, over half of which were koalas. Dr. Lathe currently works in China for Animals Asia, where she aids in the rehabilitation of bears rescued from bile

farms. She is currently contributing to studies on koala diseases and bear medicine.

AcknowledgmentsDr. Lathe would like to acknowledge the staff and volunteers

at the Adelaide Koala and Wildlife Hospital for their dedication to the region’s wildlife and for their assistance with treatments. In particular the author would like to thank Dr. Phil Hutt, who founded the hospital in 2013.

Literature Cited1. Ettinger J, Feldman E. Textbook of veterinary internal medi-

cine. Missouri: Saunders Elsevier; 2010. p. 1783–1816.2. Hemsley S, Govendir M, Canfield P, Connolly J. Diabetes

Figure 1 (top right). Gross exami-nation revealed no abnormalities aside from poor body and coat condition.

Figure 2 (bottom right). Endoscopic examination of esophagus on day eight of treatment.

Volume 36 (2) 9

mellitus in a koala (Phascolarctos cinereus). Australian Veterinary Journal. 1998;76:203–208.

3. Kono I, Sakamoto H, Shimizu T, Yasuda N. Diabetes mellitus in a koala (Phascolarctos cinereus). Veterinary Pathology. 1989; 26:528–529.

4. Di Dalmazi G, Pagotto U, Pasquali R, Vicennati V. Gluco-corticoids and types 2 diabetes: From physiology to pathology. Journal of Nutrition and Metabolism. 2012:9.

5. Canfield P, Spencer A. Haematological characterization of heavy tick infestation in koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus). Com-parative Haematology International. 1993;3:225–229.

6. Catchpole B, Davison J, Fleeman L, Ristic J. Canines diabetes mellitus: Can old dogs teach us new tricks? Diabetologia. 2005; 48:1948–1956.

7. Fennes J, Grant K, Mautner L, Mihic M. Effect of trime-thoprim-sulfamethoxazole on blood insulin and glucose con-centrations in diabetic patients. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 1919;112:80–82.


Volume 36 (2) 11

J. Wildlife Rehab. 36(2): 11–29. © 2016 International Wildlife Rehabilitation Council.

IntroductionA survey was conducted to assess current captive owl enrichment practices in the United States. Enrichment helps encourage natural behaviors expressed by animals in the wild and stimulates them physically and mentally in captivity.1 Owls are no exception; however, anyone who has had the pleasure, or perhaps frustration, of working with an owl will not think of this bird first among species that require significant stimulation.

Owls are highly instinctual predators with a very advanced brain for sensing light and sound.2,3 Owls are known to cache their food, and it has been shown that captivity reduces the hippocampal volume of other food-storing birds.4 Spatial orientation, memory, and other cognitive processes are directly linked to the avian hippocampus.5 Captivity can cause stress, social isolation, and reduced exercise, and present fewer hippocampal-related opportunities than would otherwise be experienced in the wild, thereby depriving birds the use of their abilities to exhibit natural behaviors encouraged by hippocampal growth and usage, such as caching food.4 This suggests food-caching owls in particular could benefit from enrichment that would utilize spatial orientation and memory, supporting the need to further investigate captive owl enrichment.

Owls are commonly kept in captivity because of their value as education birds.6 Enrichment is a growing facet of animal welfare that is often overlooked as a consideration in manuals on captive owl husbandry.7,6,8,9,10 Therefore, a closer examination of captive owl enrichment is warranted to help establish a baseline to improve upon within this field. Each owl genus may have unique enrichment preferences in captivity.

Captive enrichment for owls (Strigiformes)Aurora Potts

W I L D L I F E R E H A B I L I TAT I O N

ABSTRACT: Owls (Strigiformes) have been a source of fascination for wildlife rehabbers, zookeepers, falconers, and many others throughout history. They can be slow to learn and difficult to work with. Their behavior is quite different from diurnal raptors because of their unique noctur-nal adaptations. Given their popularity as education and flight demonstration birds, captive owls offer researchers and observers a chance to observe how these animals interact with the world around them. Enrichment is an important compo-nent of keeping any animal mentally and physically healthy in captivity, but devising enrichment for owls can be challenging. A survey (Appendix A) was sent to 622 wild-life rehabilitation centers, raptor centers, nature centers, zoos, falconers, and similar institutions across the United States in an effort to determine the success and failure of various methods of enrichment for vari-ous owl genera, as well as imprints versus non-imprints. Significant findings suggest distinct correlations between imprints and non-imprints for both successful and failed enrichment among Bubo and Tyto species, respectively. Additionally, significant cor-relations were measured between imprints and non-imprints among all owl genera for successful and failed enrichment.

KEYWORDS: owl, genera, enrichment, zoo, wildlife, rehabilitation, cognitive abili-ties, animal welfare, falconry, husbandry, captivity

CORRESPONDING AUTHORAurora PottsDepartment of BiologyMiami University501 E High StOxford, OH 45056Phone: (404)290-5205Email: [email protected]

Northern saw-whet owl (Aegolius acadicus).

PHO

TO ©

MA

THIA

S A

PPEL

. CC

BY-

NC

-ND

2.0

LIC

ENSE

.

Barn owl (Tyto alba).

Volume 36 (2) 11

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mathiasappel/18458982105/in/photolist-u8a7ha-8xFSsB-s8C4hk-maJydJ-7HjoxQ-oMv1YQ-bmyvAQ-4uGemM-8a8ivA-9n4cs8-fint6X-7RmbRZ-goHUcz-k9quw4-7RmbMv-nED1Sg-fGWea1-eZwX2e-bztqB6-acMzGB-acMuia-oYTHAD-crfUX7-dJjjHC-CVLAu-dnvEDT-9n1ESb-dJjj27-bztsjF-fLiyC7-dJjeYA-88Qbom-3UezXD-bmbvAg-n6tmCW-eircpE-tCgMQX-c49rHb-aaJC7J-ayRtkC-5dQfTF-nB4GxC-coKwjw-e5Lobo-83hKxA-ef4eCH-83hEM9-qteXNf-hsH6b8-ftptwZ


Frahm, and Mann (2001);16 and Timmermans et al. (2000)17 confirm the validity of the Portmann’s index to measure avian brain complexity.13

The higher the brain complexity, the more mental stimula-tion and cognitive enrichment an animal in captivity can require. Higher cognitive abilities are shown in barn owls (Tyto alba) because they use illusory outlines to determine an object.2 Barn owls have been the most extensively studied Strigiformes species, and neurological data strongly suggest they must assimilate enor-mous amounts of competing visual and auditory information in

response to stimuli.2,3 Additionally, Eastern screech owls (Megascops asio) portray a unique problem-solving intelligence given that they drop blind snakes (Leptotyphlops dulcis) into their nests to eradicate flies.18 However, when given a means-end string test, eleven great gray owls (Strix nebulosa) were unable to com-prehend the relationship between pulling a string in order to receive a food reward, with one exceptional individual that exceeded the chance

level of correct choice occurrence.12 Perhaps this test would be more successful with a barn owl. A different test that stimulates the owl’s instinctual response to auditory and visual stimuli would also likely yield better results.

Sensory enrichment for the owl’s hearing and eyesight, along with environmental enrichment such as exposure to the natural elements and hiding places, are important components for the captive owl. Wild owls must hunt for food; therefore, food enrich-ment is important for owls in captivity. Additional forms of owl enrichment may include objects to manipulate with their beak and talons (e.g., toys).

Positive reinforcement training for less stressful veterinary examinations and for the purpose of enriching and educational flight demonstrations are also great forms of enrichment for owls. Positive reinforcement training helps reduce stress with unfamiliar situations and medical procedures, but it also promotes learn-ing and mental stimulation.19,20 Positive reinforcement training involves conditioning a desired response with a reward, which is usually food. This can be problematic with many wild owls in particular, as access to food sources can be unpredictable and owls are able to fast for extended periods of time.21,22 This means they may be less food motivated and, therefore, more challenging to train and enrich in this way.

It is important to make the distinction between non-imprinted and imprinted owls. Their behavior is very different. Owls are susceptible to imprinting—identifying humans as parents and as a mate template—during the first few weeks after hatching (Roger Holloway, pers. comm., April 17, 2015). Imprinted owls are habituated to humans, and they are generally easier to train and enrich. Non-imprinted owls are more likely to exhibit signs

Owls can become imprinted when raised in captivity from a very young age, possibly resulting in a more easily trained indi-vidual.11 Many injured juvenile and adult owls arrive in captivity and are deemed non-releasable upon recovery. It is possible that imprinted owls may respond to enrichment differently from non-imprinted individuals.

Study AreaThe study area consisted of 622 wildlife rehabilitation centers, raptor centers, nature centers, zoos, falconers, and similar institu-tions in all 50 United States. These institutions represent the current practices for owl enrichment in the nation. An Internet search using the Google search engine produced these institutions using key words: owl, wildlife rehabilitation, and zoo, paired with each state’s name.

MethodsAn online survey was developed and hosted on Survey Monkey. The sur-vey consisted of six questions aimed at distinguishing successful and unsuccesful enrichment for each owl genus with respect to making the distinction between imprinted and non-imprinted owls (Appendix A). Success was determined by any engagement from at least one past or present owl under the care of the respondent. Failure was determined by at least one past or present owl under the care of the respondent ignoring enrichment or displaying signs of stress resulting from the enrichment. Potential respondents were identified at 622 wildlife rehabilitation centers, raptor centers, nature centers, zoos, falconers, and similar institutions across the United States. Invita-tions were sent by email with a link to the instrument between February 23, 2015, and March 6, 2015, in one attempt with no reminders. The survey included a statement of anonymity and consent, as well as a notice that participants must be 18 years of age or older. The survey closed on March 30, 2015. A Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) test was performed to determine whether any significant relationships could be identified for each genus, and whether there was any significant difference between imprints and non-imprints.

Discussion

Owls possess a high level of brain complexity as indicated by their Portmann’s index value of 14.37, which is just below the 15.3 value of crows.12 The Portmann’s index is measured by the ratio of weight from forebrain to brainstem compared to the body weight of the bird and is congruent with the oldest avian orders such as Galliformes and Columbiformes, having the lowest values of 3 and 4, respectively, while orders such as Psittaciformes possess values as high as 28.13 Research conducted by Stingelin (1958);14 Rehkamper, Frahm, and Zilles (1991);15 Rehkamper,

Great-horned owl (Bubo virginianus).

Volume 36 (2) 13

nities for imprints include glove training with 45 (8.8%) responses, flight training at 29 (5.7%) responses, and nesting opportunities with 25 (4.9%) responses (Appendix D). The top three most com-mon successful enrichment opportunities for non-imprints include glove training at 85 (11.4%) responses, education programs with 46 (6.2%) responses, and boxes at 27 (3.6%) responses.

The top three most common failed enrichment opportunities for imprints include general pet toys with 17 (10.7%) responses, hidden food with 7 (4.4%) responses, and nesting opportunities and balls each with 6 (3.8%) responses (Appendix E). The three most common failed enrichment opportunities for non-imprints include glove training at 23 (6%) responses, nesting opportunities and paper products each with 19 (5%) responses, plus general pet toys with 16 (4.2%) responses.

Other noteworthy results include anecdotal evidence from the survey respondents, many of whom describe an innate need or desire, among the Bubo genus in particular, to shred items. Also, the use of live prey and monitoring the length of time it takes for rehabilitated owls to catch them was discussed in depth. Although some respondents report imprints interacting more with enrichment than did non-imprints, still others report the reverse. Additionally, anecdotal evidence suggests owls remember where their food is cached. The most curious thing may be that some owls can find hidden food while others cannot. This may be attributed to their motion-based scanning strategy for hunting.2 However, I found no relationship in the data to suggest which owl genera are more or less likely to find hidden food.

Conclusions

Successful enrichment methods do not differ significantly between imprints and non-imprints, although some anecdotal evidence from survey respondents suggests age plays a major role in the willingness of a non-imprinted owl to engage with enrichment. This is similar to mammals in that younger individuals are more playful.24,25 The level of engagement with different types of enrichment appears to be more individual-based rather than imprint-based. There were not enough data collected from owl genera, other than Tyto and Bubo, to draw any other genera-based conclusions. Future research should measure age and acquire a larger sample to include other owl genera.

About the Author

Aurora Potts is a 2015 graduate from Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, and Woodland Park Zoo’s Advanced Inquiry Program. She received her undergraduate degree in Environmental Stud-ies with a Film Studies concentration and a minor in Visual Arts from Eckerd College in St. Petersburg, Florida in 2010. In the past she has worked with education raptors as a bird trainer for World Bird Sanctuary. Currently she is in charge of enrichment as a seasonal assistant wildlife rehabilitator for Progressive Ani-mal Welfare Society in Lynnwood, Washington. She hopes to continue her research with raptors professionally when the 2016 season is completed.

of distress around humans.It has been suggested that non-imprinted owls may possess

higher self-preservation instincts and avoid unfamiliar or unnatu-ral enrichment specifically. It is unclear if imprinting affects brain complexity; however, given that captivity affects hippocampal volume in food-caching birds,4 it is possible an imprinted captive owl may not get enough physical exercise, resulting in poor hip-pocampus growth compared to a non-imprinted, wild-reared owl.

A correlation coefficient was calculated for each category’s suc-cesses and failures for imprints and non-imprints, then again with imprints and non-imprints separated into genera. The frequency of success and failure for each category was recorded only once for each respective institution despite the number of individual birds in captivity (past or present). Depending on the genus, certain responses fell under different categories; for example, live fish are more likely visual (sensory) stimulation for Aegolius, but can fall under novel (food) for the larger genus Strix.

A correlation coefficient above 0.5 indicated a relationship was present.23 Some survey responses provided broad responses while others were very specific. In order to include as many responses as possible in the analysis, specific enrichment was categorized into smaller categories within the main five aforementioned. For responses listing something broad, e.g., “novel food item” with no description of the item, each smaller category such as “Food–novel” added all specific novel food items listed in addition to the occasional broad answer. While the response “novel food item” could not be used with a specific novel food item, the response still contributed to the overall category in this way.

Results

Although the survey had a 21% (n = 133) total response rate, 29% (n = 39) of submitted surveys were incomplete, resulting in a 15% net response rate (n = 94). Survey responses were analyzed and grouped into five categories of enrichment: (1) sensory; (2) food; (3) manipulational; (4) environmental; and (5) social.

There was a high correlation between imprinted and non-imprinted Bubo species for both successful engagement (r = 0.928) and unsuccessful engagement (r = 0.757) with specific enrichment items (i.e., both imprints and non-imprints engaged with or failed to engage with the same enrichment items). Similarly, there was a high correlation between imprinted and non-imprinted Tyto species for both successful engagement (r = 0.887) and unsuc-cessful engagement (r = 0.757) with specific enrichment items (Appendices B and C). These two genera were the most prevalent in the survey responses and are likely the most commonly found in US wildlife rehabilitation centers and zoos.

Additionally, a significant correlation exists between the engagement responses of imprints and non-imprints across all reported owl genera for both successful enrichment (r = 0.933) and unsuccessful enrichment (r = 0.840). These data suggest little distinction is necessary in the choice of the enrichment provided to imprinted and non-imprinted captive owls (Appendices D and E).

The top three most common successful enrichment opportu-

Volume 36 (2) 13


AcknowledgmentsMy advisor, Katie Remine, deserves very special recognition for all of her guidance and help with this project. Particular thanks to Woodland Park Zoo raptor keepers for inspiring this research and Project Dragonfly at Miami University for assisting with its facilitation. Special thanks to the World Bird Sanctuary staff for supporting this research with great knowledge and experience. Additional gratitude is expressed to Cheyenne Mountain Zoo, Cleveland Metroparks Zoo, Walt Disney World Animals, and all anonymous institutions that participated in the owl enrich-ment survey; this project would not be complete without your participation. Thank you.

Literature Cited1. Association of Zoos and Aquariums. Enrichment. Accessed

2015 Aug 11. https://www.aza.org/enrichment/2. Harmening WM, Wagner H. From optics to attention: Visual

perception in barn owls. Journal of Comparative Physiology. 2011;197:1031–1042. doi 10.1007/s00359-011-0664-3.

3. Peña JL, DeBello WM. Auditory processing, plasticity, and learning in the barn owl. ILAR Journal. 2010;51(4):338–352.

4. Tarr BA, Rabinowitz JS, Imtiaz MA, DeVoogd TJ. Captiv-ity reduces hippocampal volume but not survival of new cells in a food-storing bird. Wiley InterScience. doi 10:1002/dneu.20736. 2009.

5. Sherry DF, MacDougall-Shackleton SA. Seasonal change in avian hippocampus. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology. 2015;37(1):158–167. doi 10.1016/j.yfrne.2014.11.008.

6. Caudell J, Riddleberger K. Management of nonreleasable rap-tors for conservation education programs. Journal of Raptor Research. 2001;35(1):49–57.

7. Blair SK. Caring For Raptors 7th Edition. Caring for Wild Birds in Captivity Series (Adelaide and Environs):1-11. 2000.

8. Joseph V, Ferrier W. Captive propagation: A raptor manage-ment program. Journal of the Association of Avian Veterinarians. 1990;4(1):16–18.

9. Moore GL. Techniques for propagation of captive raptors. Association of Avian Veterinarians Today. 1987;1(5):209–212.

10. Park F. Behavior and behavioral problems of Australian raptors in captivity. Seminars in Avian and Exotic Medicine. 2003;12(4):232–241.

11. Sanchez A. Nocturnal mind: Study of the behavior of noc-turnal predators in captivity and specialized training guide. Spain: Anna Sanchez. 2014.

12. Obozova TA, Zorina ZA. Do great grey owls comprehend means end relationships? International Journal of Comparative Psychology. 2013;26:197–201.

13. Zorina Z, Obozova T. New data on the brain and cogni-tive abilities of birds. Biology Bulletin. 2012;39(7):601–617. doi:10.1134/S1062359012070126.

14. Stingelin W. Vergleichende morphologische Untersuchungen am Vorderhirn der Vogel auf cytoarchitektonischer Grundlage. Basel: Helbing and Lichtenhahn. 1958.

15. Rehkamper G, Frahm HD, Zilles K. Quantitative develop-ment of brain and brain structures in birds (Galliformes and Passeriformes) compared to that in mammals (insectivores and primates). Brain, Behavior and Evolution. 1991;37:125–143.

16. Rehkamper G, Frahm H, Mann MD. Evolutionary con-straints of large telencephala. Brain Evolution and Cognition, New York: Willey:49-77. 2001.

17. Timmermans S, Lefebvre L, Boire D, Basu P. Relative size of the hyperstriatum ventrale is the best predictor of feed-ing innovation rate in birds. Brain, Behavior and Evolution. 2000;56(4):196–203.

18. Gehlbach FR, Baldridge RS. Live blind snakes (Leptotyphlops dulcis) in Eastern screech owl (Otus asio) nests: A novel com-mensalism. Oecologia. 1987;(4):560.

19. Heidenreich B. An introduction to positive reinforcement training and its benefits. Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine. 2007;16(1):19–23.

20. Melfi V. Is training zoo animals enriching? Applied Animal Behavior Science. 2013;147:299–305.

21. Hohtola E, Pyornila A, Rintamaki H. Fasting endurance and cold resistance without hypothermia in a small predatory bird—The metabolic strategy of Tengmalm owl, Aegolius-funereus. Journal of Comparative Physiology B-Biochemical Systemic and Environmental Physiology. 1994;164(6):430–437.

22. Thouzeau C, Duchamp C, Handrich Y. Energy metabolism and body temperature of barn owls fasting in the cold. Physi-ological and Biochemical Zoology. 1999;72(2):170.

23. Wall Emerson R. Causation and Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Journal of Visual Impairment of and Blindness. 2015;36(3):242–244.

24. Fagen R. Animal play behavior. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.

25. Pellis SM, Pellis VC. Play fighting of rats in comparative per-spective: A schema for neurobehavioral analyses. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 1998;23(1):87–101.

Volume 36 (2) 15

APPENDIX A. Survey Questions.

Page 1. Imprint or not.Imprint: Definition (verb): (of a young animal) come to recognize (another animal, person, or thing) as a parent or other object of habitual trust.

If any of your individuals are imprints, please indicate which owl genus they belong to. <multiple choice, allowed more than one answer.>

Please indicate here if you have multiple individuals of the same genus, where at least one individual is an imprint while the other is not. Please name the genus.

Page 2. Successful enrichment for owl genera.Specific examples may fall under these categories:

Sensory (auditory, olfactory, tactile)FoodManipulatingEnvironmental (substrate)Social (training)

Page 3. Unsuccessful enrichment for owl genera.Examples may include ignoring an item such as a rope, being unable to locate a reward under a cup, failing to respond to a cue such as entering a box, or exhibiting signs of stress in response to any attempted enrichment.

Please list enrichment items/opportunities (including specific training) that have failed to engage any and all owl genera you’ve

Page 4. The end! Thank you for your contribution to this survey. Your responses will be used to assist in the continued efforts to improve the lives of owls in captivity.

TytoPhodilusOtusMegascopsPyrroglauxGymnoglauxPtilopsis

MimizukuBuboScotopeliaStrixJubulaLophostrixPulsatrix

SurniaGlaucidiumXenoglauxMicratheneAtheneAegoliusNinox

UroglauxSceloglauxPseudoscopsAsioNesasio

<comment box>

Please list enrichment items/opportunities (including specific training) that have succesfully engaged any and all owl genera you’ve housed in captivity past or present. <multiple textboxes> (same as above list of owl species)

Please indicate here if you have multiple individuals of the same genus where one individual responded positively to enrich-ment while the other was unsuccessful. Please name the genus and specify if one is an imprint while the other is not. <comment box>

housed past or present. <multiple text boxes> (same as above list of owl species)

Please indicate here if you have multiple individuals of the same genus where one individual failed to respond positively to attempted enrichment while the other was successful. Please name the genus and specify if one is an imprint while the other is not. <comment box>

APPENDIX B. Successful enrichment.

Successful Enrichment for Tyto. Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-ImprintSensory—General Auditory 6 9

Recorded owl calls 1 1Recorded nature sounds 2 1Music 1 0Wind chimes 0 0Jingle bells 0 0

Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-Imprint

Maracas 0 0Metal clapper spoon 0 0Random noise 0 0High-pitched squeak 1 0Remote audio flight cue 1 1Noise-maker 0 0

Sensory—General Visual 4 3

Reflective items (ex: mirrors) 1 2Surrounding wildlife 0 1Live fish 0 0Live insects 2 0Mobiles 0 0Bubbles 0 0Animal photos 0 0

Chalk drawings 0 0Laser pointer 1 0Bright colors 0 0Floating object 0 0Sunken object 0 0Watching TV 0 0

Volume 36 (2) 15

APPENDIX B. Successful Enrichment for Tyto (cont.) Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-Imprint Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-ImprintSensory—General Taste 1 0 Spices 1 0

Sensory—General Tactile 23 11

Leather 1 0Wool 0 0Ice 0 0Animal hide/fur/pelts 1 0Handler’s touch 1 0Paper mache 2 1Tin metal 0 0Burlap 0 0Nesting opportunities/substrates 8 3Greenery/browse 2 2Variety substrate 2 1Stumps 0 0Newspaper 1 0Brush pile 1 0

Mulch pile 1 1Sandbox 0 0Rubber 0 0Litter mat 0 0Sisal rope wrap 0 0Tissue paper 0 0Artificial grass 3 0Rocks 0 1Wood 0 1Carpet 0 1Snow 0 0Felt 0 0Talc powder 0 0Non-toxic paint on poster 0 0

Sensory—General Olfactory 0 0

Synthetic deer urine 0 0Herbs 0 0Perfume 0 0

Food—Hidden 11 8

Food—Novel 14 15

Skewered 1 0Varied 3 2Live prey 2 5Large/whole prey 2 0Chunk meat 0 0Chick 1 0Gizzard 0 0Rabbits 0 0Natural Balance 5% 1 0Fish 0 1Puzzle feeder 1 0Mealworms 0 0Produce 1 2Differing locations 0 0Skunk 0 0Squirrel 0 0

Move barrier to access food 0 1Coconut feeder 1 0Pinecone feeder 0 1Suet feeder 0 1Live insects 0 0Killed sparrows 0 0Time variation 0 0Blood 0 0Popsicles 0 0Popcorn 0 0Cooked pasta 0 0Oatmeal 0 0Yogurt 0 0Corn on the cob 0 0Pumpkin 0 0Jello treats 0 0

Manipulatory—Artificial Toy 19 7

Stuffed animal 5 3Balls 3 1Rope toys 1 2Kongs 1 0General dog/cat/parrot toys 6 0Rubber material 0 0

Dishes 0 0Brush/broom heads 0 0Feather duster 1 0Plastic material 0 0Willow basket 0 0Scrub brushes 1 0


Volume 36 (2) 17Volume 36 (2) 17

Manipulatory—Artificial Toy (cont’d.)

Hanging toy 1 1Shoe 1 0Baby ring tower 0 0Keys on ring 0 0

Bowling pins 0 0Hula hoop 0 0Leather toy 0 0Bandana w/ knot 0 0

Manipulatory-Recycled Toy 12 6

Paper/paper towels/decorations 3 5Paper cups 0 1Paper bags 1 0Plastic jugs w/ holes 0 0Tubes (cardboard or PVC) 2 0Piece of rope 1 0Egg cartons 1 0Phone books 1 0TP rolls 0 0Straw hat 0 0

Rice-stuffed sock for heating food 0 0Cereal box/small cardboard box 3 0Crickets in plastic bottle 1 0Cereal box 0 0Basket 0 0Pie plate 0 0Plastic produce container 0 0Pillow case tied to perch 0 0Rags 0 0

Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-Imprint Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-Imprint

Manipulatory–Natural Toy 4 1

Snake skins 0 0Corn husks 0 0Feathers 2 0Rawhide 0 0Bones 1 0Pinecones 1 0

Leaves for shredding 0 0Antlers 0 0Hard-boiled egg 0 0Horse hair 0 0Sedge tied w/ knots 0 0Corn on the cob 0 1

Environmental—General Enrichment 6 5Change of scenery 2 1Heat lamps 1 1Owl decoys 0 0

Duck decoys 1 0 Gourds/pumpkins/squash 1 1 Weathering/outdoor 1 2

Environmental—Water Enrichment 2 2Water tubs 1 2Misting/sprinkler 1 0

Environmental—Furniture 12 6

Stumps 1 0Swings 1 1Branches 3 2Logs 1 0Willow baskets 0 0Variety perching 4 2Traffic cone 0 0

Environmental—Hiding Places 7 7

Boxes (nest or cardboard) 6 6Shelter 0 1Burrow 0 0

Christmas tree 1 1Evergreen wreath 0 0Corn shock 0 0Chicken-sized rubber ball 1 0Scarecrow 1 0Snags 0 0Telephone cable perch 0 0

Butcher paper around cage 1 0Cavity 0 0


Social—Interspecies Interaction 1 4

Hooting w/ human 0 0Fostering 0 0

APPENDIX B. Successful Enrichment for Tyto (cont.) Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-Imprint Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-ImprintSocial—Any Training 33 30

Carry an item 0 1“GO” to perch cue 0 0Wing extension 0 1Open mouth 0 0V-jumps 1 1Vocalize 0 0

Glove training 12 13Education programs 5 8Flight training (w/or w/o creance) 12 2Kennel training 2 3Walks 1 1New situations 0 0Targeting 0 0

Perching in main room/office 1 1Opportunity to lay & incubate 0 0

Correlation = 0.886808035

Successful Enrichment for Bubo Bubo Imprint Bubo Non-Imprint Bubo Imprint Bubo Non-ImprintSensory—General Auditory 7 7


Maracas 0 0Metal clapper spoon 0 0Random noise 0 0High-pitched squeak 0 0 Remote audio flight cue 0 0Noise-maker 0 0


Reflective items (ex: mirrors) 5 3 Surrounding wildlife 3 2Live fish 1 2Live insects 1 1Mobiles 0 0Bubbles 0 0Animal photos 0 1

Chalk drawings 0 0Laser pointer 0 0Bright colors 0 0Floating object 0 0Sunken object 0 0Watching TV 0 0

Sensory—General Taste 1 0Spices 1 0


Leather 1 0Wool 1 1Ice 1 1Animal hide/fur/pelts 2 1Handler’s touch 2 2Paper mache 2 2Tin metal 1 0Burlap 1 0Nesting opportunities/substrates 11 14Greenery/browse 4 7Variety substrate 4 4Stumps 1 0Newspaper 2 2Brush pile 1 1

Mulch pile 1 2Sandbox 1 2Rubber 0 1Litter mat 0 1Sisal rope wrap 0 1Tissue paper 0 1Artificial grass 0 1 Rocks 0 1Wood 0 0Carpet 0 0Snow 0 0Felt 0 0Talc powder 0 0Non-toxic paint on poster 0 0

Volume 36 (2) 19



Food—Hidden 7 6

Food-Novel 21 22

Skewered 1 1Varied 5 4Live prey 1 6Large/whole prey 1 1Chunk meat 1 0Chick 2 1Gizzard 1 1Rabbits 1 0Natural Balance 5% 1 0Fish 1 0Puzzle feeder 1 1Mealworms 1 0Produce 1 1Differing locations 1 1Skunk 0 1Squirrel 0 1

Bubo Imprint Bubo Non-Imprint Bubo Imprint Bubo Non-Imprint

Move barrier to access food 0 1Coconut feeder 0 1Pinecone feeder 0 1Suet feeder 0 0Live insects 0 0Killed sparrows 0 0Time variation 0 0Blood 0 0Popsicles 0 0Popcorn 0 0Cooked pasta 0 0Oatmeal 0 0Yogurt 0 0Corn on the cob 0 0Pumpkin 0 0Jello treats 0 0

Successful Enrichment for Bubo (cont.)


Stuffed animal 7 2Balls 10 7Rope toys 4 1Kongs 3 3General dog/cat/parrot toys 6 0Rubber material 1 0Dishes 1 1Brush/broom heads 1 0Feather duster 1 0Plastic material 0 2Willow basket 0 1

Scrub brushes 0 1Hanging toys 0 0Shoe 0 0Baby ring tower 0 0Keys on ring 0 0Bowling pins 0 0Hula hoop 0 0Hanging toy 0 0Leather toy 0 0Bandana w/ knot 0 0

Manipulatory—Recycled Toy 24 30

Paper/paper towels/decorations 7 9Paper cups 1 1Paper bags 2 2Plastic jugs w/ holes 1 0Tubes (cardboard or PVC) 6 2Piece of rope 2 1Egg cartons 2 3Phone books 3 5TP rolls 0 3Straw hat 0 1

Sock stuffed with rice for heating food 0 1Cereal box/small cardboard box 0 0Crickets in plastic bottle 0 0Cereal box 0 0Basket 0 0Pie plate 0 0Plastic produce container 0 0Pillow case tied to perch 0 0Rags 0 0

Volume 36 (2) 19


APPENDIX B. Successful Enrichment for Bubo (cont.) Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-Imprint Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-Imprint


Manipulatory—Natural Toy 12 15


Environmental—General Enrichment 9 8

Change of scenery 5 2Heat lamps 1 1Owl decoys 1 0

Environmental—Water Enrichment 9 10

Water tubs 2 3Misting/sprinkler 7 7

Environmental—Furniture 1 3 21

Stumps 1 2Swings 1 2Branches 5 6Logs 2 2Willow baskets 1 0Variety perching 3 5Traffic cone 1 0

Duck decoys 0 0Gourds/pumpkins/squash 1 3Weathering/outdoor 1 2

Christmas tree 0 1Evergreen wreath 0 1Corn shock 0 1Chicken-sized rubber ball 0 0Scarecrow 0 0Snags 0 0Telephone cable perch 0 0


Boxes (nest or cardboard) 5 7Shelter 0 2Burrow 0 0

Butcher paper around cage 0 0Cavity 0 0

Social—Any Training 48 41

Glove training 21 19Education programs 6 10Flight training (w/ or w/o creance) 12 2Kennel training 2 4Walks 4 2New situations 1 1Targeting 1 0

Carry an item 1 0“GO” to perch cue 0 1Wing extension 0 1Open mouth 0 1V-jumps 0 0Vocalize 0 0

Social-Species Interaction 3 5




Volume 36 (2) 21

Sensory—General Auditory 3 6

Recorded owl calls 0 0Recorded nature sounds 1 1Music 0 1Wind chimes 0 3

APPENDIX C. Failed Enrichment. Failed Enrichment for Tyto Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-Imprint

Jingle bells 0 0Maracas/rattle 0 1Metal clapper spoon 0 0Random noise 1 0Noise-maker 1 0



Reflective items (ex: mirrors) 0 0Surrounding wildlife 0 0Live fish 1 3Live insects 1 1Mobiles 0 0Bubbles 0 3

Animal photos 0 0Chalk drawings 0 0Laser pointer 0 1Floating object 0 0Sunken object 0 0Bright colors 0 1

Sensory-General Taste 0 1Spices 0 1

Sensory-General Tactile 7 17

Leather 0 1Wool 0 3Ice 0 2Animal hide/fur/pelts 1 0Handler’s touch 0 0Paper mache 0 2Tin metal 0 0Burlap 1 0Nesting opportunities/substrates 1 5Greenery/browse 1 1Variety substrate 0 0

Stumps 0 0Newspaper 0 1Brush pile 0 0Mulch pile 0 0Sandbox 1 0Felt 1 0Talc powder 0 0Artificial grass 1 0Rocks 0 0Bark 0 1Non-toxic paint on poster 0 1Litter mat 0 1

Sensory-General Olfactory 1 3


Food-Hidden 2 4

Food-Novel 4 4Skewered 0 1Varied 0 0Live prey 0 0Large/whole prey 0 0Chunk meat 0 0Chick 0 0Gizzard 0 0Rabbits 0 0Natural Balance 5% 0 0Fish 0 0Puzzle feeder 0 0Mealworms 1 0

Produce 0 1Differing locations 0 0Blood 0 0Popsicles 0 0Popcorn 0 0Cooked pasta 0 0Oatmeal 0 0Yogurt 0 0Corn on the cob 1 0Pumpkin 1 0Jello treats 0 1Varied time 0 0Manipulate barrier to access food 0 1

Volume 36 (2) 21



Stuffed animal 2 2Balls 0 2Rope toys 1 1Kongs 1 2General dog/cat/parrot toys 9 4Rubber material 0 0Dishes 0 0Baby ring tower 1 0

APPENDIX C. Failed Enrichment for Tyto (cont.) Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-Imprint

Keys on ring 1 0Plastic frog 0 0Bowling pins 0 0Brush/broom heads 0 1Hula hoop 0 0Hanging toy 1 0Leather/sheepskin toy 1 0Bandana w/ knot 0 0



Paper/paper towels 1 4Paper cups 1 0Paper bags 0 0Plastic jugs w/ holes 0 0Tubes (cardboard or PVC) 1 1Feather duster 0 0Piece of rope 0 1

Egg cartons 0 0Phone books 1 0Cereal box 0 0Basket 0 0Pie plate 0 0Plastic produce container 1 0Pillow case tied to perch 0 0Rags 0 0



Antlers 0 0Dried flowers/herbs 0 0Hanging log toy 1 0Hard-boiled egg 0 1Horse hair 0 1Eggshells 0 1

Environmental—General Enrichment 0 1Change of scenery 0 0Heat lamps 0 0

Owl decoys 0 0Duck decoys 0 0Gourds/pumpkins/squash 0 1Weathering/outdoor 0 0



Scarecrow 1 0Stumps 0 0Swings 0 0Branches 0 0Logs 0 0Willow baskets 0 0

Variety perching 0 0Traffic cone 1 0Plastic yellow chair 1 0Garbage lid 1 0Corn shocks 0 1Evergreen wreath 0 1Christmas tree 0 0



Boxes (nest or cardboard) 0 0Shelter 0 0

Burrow 0 0Cavity 0 0


Glove training 0 1Education programs 0 0Flight training (w/ or w/o creance) 1 0

Kennel training 0 0Walks 0 0New situations 0 0Targeting 0 0

Volume 36 (2) 23

(cont.)Social—Any Training 2 1

Carry an item 0 0Non-food reward 0 0

Exercise yard 1 0Wing extension 0 0

Social-Species Interaction 0 0


Children 0 0Opportunity to lay & incubate 0 0Perching in main room or office 0 0


Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-Imprint Tyto Imprint Tyto Non-Imprint

Jingle bells 1 0Maracas/rattle 1 0Metal clapper spoon 1 0Random noise 1 0Noise-maker 0 0

Failed Enrichment for Bubo Bubo Imprint Bubo Non-Imprint Bubo Imprint Bubo Non-Imprint


Recorded owl calls 0 0Recorded nature sounds 0 1Music 0 0Wind chimes 1 0


Reflective items (ex: mirrors) 3 0Surrounding wildlife 0 1Live fish 1 0Live insects 0 0Mobiles 1 0Bubbles 1 0

Animal photos 1 0Chalk drawings 1 0Laser pointer 0 0Bright colors 0 0Floating object 0 0Sunken object 0 0



Leather 0 0Wool 0 0Ice 1 0Animal hide/fur/pelts 0 0Handler’s touch 0 1Paper mache 0 0Tin metal 0 1Burlap 0 0Nesting opportunities/substrates 5 2Greenery/browse 2 1Variety substrate 0 0

Stumps 0 0Newspaper 0 1Brush pile 0 0Mulch pile 0 0Sandbox 0 0Felt 1 0Talc powder 1 0Artificial grass 1 0Rocks 1 0Bark 0 0Non-toxic paint on poster 0 0Litter mat 0 0



Food—Hidden 2 1

Food—Novel 9 3

Skewered 0 0Varied 0 0Live prey 0 0

Large/whole prey 0 0Chunk meat 0 0Chick 1 0

(continued)

Volume 36 (2) 23

Food—Novel (cont.) 2 1

Gizzard 0 0Rabbits 0 1Natural Balance 5% 0 1Fish 0 0Puzzle feeder 0 0Mealworms 0 1Produce 1 0Differing locations 0 0Blood 1 0


Popsicles 2 0Popcorn 1 0Cooked pasta 1 0Oatmeal 1 0Yogurt 1 0Corn on the cob 0 0Pumpkin 0 0Jello treats 0 0Varied time 0 0Move barrier to access food 0 0


Stuffed animal 1 2Balls 4 0Rope toys 2 0Kongs 0 0General dog/cat/parrot toys 8 5Rubber material 1 0Dishes 0 0Baby ring tower 1 0

Keys on ring 1 0Plastic frog 1 0Bowling pins 1 0Brush/broom heads 1 0Hula hoop 1 0Hanging toy 0 0Leather/sheepskin toy 0 1Bandana w/ knot 0 0


Paper/paper towels 2 5Paper cups 0 1Paper bags 0 0Plastic jugs w/ holes 0 0Tubes (cardboard or PVC) 1 0Feather duster 0 0Piece of rope 0 0

Egg cartons 0 2Phone books 1 1Cereal box 1 0Basket 1 0Pie plate 1 0Plastic produce container 2 0Pillow case tied to perch 0 0Rags 0 0

Manipulatory—Natural Toy 7 0Snake skins 1 0Corn husks 0 0Feathers 2 0Rawhide 0 0Bones 0 0Pinecones 1 0







Scarecrow 0 0Stumps 0 0Swings 0 0Branches 0 0Logs 0 0Willow baskets 0 0

Variety perching 0 0Traffic cone 1 0Plastic yellow chair 1 0Garbage lid 0 0Corn shocks 0 0Evergreen wreath 0 0Christmas tree


Volume 36 (2) 25Volume 36 (2) 25


Environmental—Hiding Places 5 0Boxes (nest or cardboard) 5 0Shelter 0 0



Glove training 0 1Education programs 0 0Flight training (w/ or w/o creance) 0 0Kennel training 0 0Walks 0 0

New situations 1 0Targeting 0 0Carry an item 0 0Non-food reward 1 0Exercise yard 0 0Wing extension 0 0

Social—Species Interaction 0 0


Children 0 0Opportunity to lay & incubate 0 0Perching in main room or office 0 0


APPENDIX DOccurrence of Successful Enrichment Among All Genera

Imprint Non-Imprint


Recorded owl calls 3 8Recorded nature sounds 3 5Music 4 6

Imprint Non-Imprint

Wind chimes 2 4Jingle bells 0 1High-pitched squeak 1 0Remote audio flight cue 1 1


Reflective items (ex: mirrors) 13 12Surrounding wildlife 5 9Live fish 2 3

Live insects 3 2Animal photos 0 1Laser pointer 1 0Watching TV 1 1



Leather 2 0Wool 2 1Ice 2 2Animal hide/fur/pelts 4 4

Handler’s touch 4 8Paper mache 4 5Tin metal 1 0Burlap 1 0

Nesting opportunities/substrates 25 26

Greenery/browse 7 20Variety substrate 11 15Stumps 1 0Newspaper 3 3Brush pile 2 4Mulch pile 2 5Sandbox 2 4Rubber 0 1

Litter mat 0 1Sisal rope wrap 0 1Tissue paper 0 1Artificial grass 3 2Rocks 0 3Wood 0 1Carpet 0 1Snow 0 1

Sensory—General Olfactory 0 0Perfume 0 0

Food—Hidden 22 20 (continued)

Food—Novel 48 100

Skewered 2 2Varied 14 15Live prey 4 26Large/whole prey 3 3Chunk meat 1 0Chick 3 4Gizzard 1 3Rabbits 1 0Natural Balance 5% 2 0Fish 1 1Puzzle feeder 2 3

APPENDIX D. Occurrence of Successful Enrichment Among All Genera (cont.) Imprint Non-Imprint Imprint Non-Imprint

Produce 2 4Differing locations 1 6Skunk 0 1Squirrel 0 1Move barrier to access food 0 3Coconut feeder 1 1Pinecone feeder 0 2Suet feeder 0 1Live insects 9 20Killed sparrows 0 2Time variation 0 3


Stuffed animal 15 10Balls 17 14Rope toys 6 3Kongs 6 6General dog/cat/parrot toys 12 7Rubber material 1 0Dishes 1 1

Brush/broom heads 1 0Feather duster 2 1Plastic material 0 2Willow basket 0 1Scrub brushes 1 1Hanging toys 1 1Shoe 1 0Bandana w/ knot 1 0


Paper/paper towels/decorations 12 17Paper cups 1 2Paper bags 3 2Plastic jugs w/ holes 2 0Tubes (cardboard or PVC) 10 9Piece of rope 3 3Egg cartons 3 3

Phone books 4 8TP rolls 0 3Straw hat 0 1Rice-stuffed sock for heating food 0 1Cereal box/small cardboard box 3 1Crickets in plastic bottle 1 0Pillow case tied to perch 0 1Rags 1 0








Environmental—Furniture 29 54Stumps 2 2Swings 2 5Branches 10 17

Logs 3 4Willow baskets 1 0Variety perching 8 16Traffic cone 1 0


Volume 36 (2) 27Volume 36 (2) 27

Christmas tree 1 4Evergreen wreath 0 1Corn shock 0 1

Environmental—Furniture (cont.) Chicken-sized rubber ball 1 0Scarecrow 1 0Snags 0 1Telephone cable perch 0 1



Burrow 0 1Butcher paper around cage 1 1Cavity 1 1


Glove training 45 85Education programs 16 46Flight training w/ or w/o creance 29 8Kennel training 4 15Walks 5 13New situations 2 3

Targeting 1 1Carry an item 1 1“GO” to perch cue 0 1Wing extension 0 3Open mouth 0 1V-jumps 1 1Vocalize 0 1

Social—Species Interaction 8 17




APPENDIX EOccurrence of Failed Enrichment Among All Genera Imprint Non-ImprintSensory—General Auditory 10 21


Imprint Non-Imprint Imprint Non-Imprint

Imprint Non-ImprintMaracas/rattle 1 1Metal clapper spoon 1 0Random noise 3 0Noise-maker 1 0Remote auditory cue 1 0Radio talk show 0 1


Reflective items (ex: mirrors) 5 9Surrounding wildlife 0 5Live fish 2 8Live insects 1 2Mobiles 1 0Bubbles 1 6Animal photos 1 1

Chalk drawings 1 1Laser pointer 0 1Bright colors 0 3Floating object 0 1Sunken object 0 1Hand movements 1 0Watching TV 0 1



Leather 0 1Wool 1 6Ice 1 3Animal hide/fur/pelts 2 1Handler’s touch 0 5Paper mache 0 8

Tin metal 0 1Burlap 1 0Nesting opportunities/substrates 6 19Greenery/browse 3 6Variety substrate 0 5Newspaper 0 4

(continued)

Brush pile 0 2Mulch pile 0 1Sandbox 1 1Felt 2 0Talc powder 1 0

Sensory—General Tactile (cont.)

Artificial grass 2 1Rocks 1 0Bark 0 1Non-toxic paint on poster 0 1Litter mat 0 2


Synthetic deer urine 1 0


Herbs 1 1Perfume 1 2

Food—Hidden 7 15

Food—Novel 15 37

Skewered 0 1Varied 0 3Live prey 1 9Large/whole prey 0 2Chick 1 1Gizzard 0 1Rabbits 0 1Natural Balance 5% 0 1Puzzle feeder 1 2Live insects 1 2Produce 1 3

Differing locations 0 1Blood 1 0Popsicles 2 1Popcorn 1 1Cooked pasta 1 1Oatmeal 1 1Yogurt 1 1Corn on the cob 1 0Pumpkin 1 0Jello treats 0 1Varied time 0 1Move barrier to access food 0 2


Stuffed Animal 3 7Balls 6 10Rope toys 3 2Kongs 1 5General dog/cat/parrot toys 17 16Rubber material 1 0Baby ring tower 2 0

Keys on ring 2 0Plastic frog 1 0Bowling pins 1 0Brush/broom heads 1 2Hula hoop 1 0Hanging toy 1 0Leather/sheepskin toy 1 1Feather duster 0 1


Paper/paper towels 4 19Paper cups 1 1


Snake skins 2 6Corn husks 0 1Feathers 4 5Bones 0 1Pinecones 3 4



Owl decoys 0 2Gourds/pumpkins/squash 1 3Weathering/outdoor 0 2


Volume 36 (2) 29Volume 36 (2) 29

Environmental—Water Enrichment 3 13Water tubs 0 6Misting/sprinkler 3 5Environmental-Furniture 6 19Scarecrow 1 0Swings 0 2Branches 0 3


Logs 0 1Variety perching 0 3Traffic cone 2 0Plastic yellow chair 2 0Garbage lid 1 0Corn shocks 0 2Evergreen wreath 0 3Christmas tree 0 1





Glove training 0 23Education programs 1 11Flight training (w/ or w/o creance) 1 2Kennel training 0 3Walks 0 4

New situations 1 1Targeting 0 1Non-food reward 1 0Exercise yard 1 0Wing extension 0 1

Social—Interspecies Interaction 0 4

Children 0 1Perching in main room or office 0 1Humans watching enrichment 0 1



S E L E C T E D A B S T R A C T S

Rehabilitation and post-release monitoring of two wolves with severe injuriesH Rio-Maior, P Beja, M Nakamura, N Santos, R Brandão, et al. Journal of Wildlife Manage-ment. 2016;80:729–735.

Injured free-ranging wolves (Canis lupus) are often rehabilitated and released into the wild, but there is limited data on their post-release survival and behavior. We used global positioning system telemetry to document movements and spatial overlap with resident packs of two wolves in north-ern Portugal that were released following rehabilitation from severe traumatic inju-ries and were kept in captivity for 10–12 weeks in 2012. A yearling female, with a complex fracture on the thoracic limb, traveled 2,709 km over about 643 km2, during the 12 months post-release before being illegally shot. During the first eight months, it was located frequently around three different pack territories, but after-wards its movements were restricted to a single pack territory. We tracked a yearling male with an amputated hind limb for five months and it traveled 922 km over about 574 km2 before dying in a road casualty. It visited four different pack territories in suc-cession but also spent time outside known territory boundaries. Our findings suggest that rehabilitated wolves can recover their locomotor activity and survive in the wild for several months, even after suffering severe injuries and spending three months or longer in captivity.

Using tailored tranquilizer combi-nations to reduce stress associated with large ungulate capture and translocation

LL Wolfe and MW Miller. Journal of Wildlife Diseases. 2016 Apr;52(2 Suppl):S118-24. doi: 10.7589/52.2S.S118.

Capture and translocation are important tools for managing and studying large ungulates. Although widely used, many established field practices cause fear and stress in subject animals that can hamper overall effectiveness and safety. Over the

last 10 years, we have been exploring uses of tranquilizer combinations as adjuncts to wild ungulate capture and translocation work in Colorado, USA. Our approaches have been tailored to various field applica-tions to reduce fear and stress, facilitate handling, and improve the overall success of capture and translocation for research or management purposes. For physical capture (drop net or helicopter-net gun-ning) with local release, combinations of midazolam and azaperone administered immediately upon capture provide tran-sient tranquilization and muscle relaxation during manual restraint and handling to prevent hyperthermia and capture myopa-thy. For extended tranquilization (during transport and overnight holding), adding a sustained-release haloperidol formulation provides calming effects for at least 24–48 h. In our assessment, appropriate and adap-tive use of these tranquilizer combinations benefits captured animals without imped-ing management or research goals.

Related topic:Efficacy and safety of a medetomi-dine–azaperone–alfaxalone combi-nation in captive white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus)K Pon, N Caulkett, and M Woodbury. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine. 2016;47(29-37)

Advances in animal welfare for free-living animalsWildlife Welfare Supplement Editorial Board. Journal of Wildlife Diseases. 2016;52(S4-S13)

Over several decades, animal welfare has grown into its own free-standing field of scientific study, from its early beginnings in laboratory animal research to eventu-ally include exhibited animals and farm animals. While it has always been present to some degree, consideration of animal welfare for free-ranging animals has lagged behind, developing as a field of study in the last 20 years or so. Part of that increase was that animal welfare legislation was finally applied to studies being done on free-rang-ing animals. But it is the appreciation by the biologists and veterinarians working on wild animals, in which the quality of their results is largely controlled by the quality of the animals they use in their studies, which

has resulted in increased attention to the well-being or welfare of the animals that they use. Other important influences driv-ing the recognition of wildlife welfare have been changes in the public’s expectations of how wild animals are dealt with, a shift in focus of wildlife professionals from manag-ing animals that can be hunted or angled to include nongame species, the decrease in participation in hunting and fishing by members of the public, and the entry of large numbers of women into fish and wildlife agencies and departments and into veterinary medicine. Technical improve-ments have allowed the safe capture and handling of large or dangerous animals as immobilization drugs and equipment have been developed. The increasing use of sedating drugs allows for handling of animals with reduced stress and other impacts. A number of topics, such as toe-clipping, branding, defining which taxa can or cannot feel pain, catch-and-release fishing, and more, remain controversial within wildlife science. How we treat the wild animals that we deal with defines who we are as wildlife professionals, and animal welfare concerns and techniques for free-ranging animals will continue to develop and evolve.

Mass change values of landbird migrants at an inland stopover site dominated by nonnative vegetation

RJ Smith, MI Hatch. The American Midland Naturalist. 2016;175(1)

Early successional habitats are declining in eastern North America while at the same time remaining habitats are being invaded by a suite of nonnative shrub species. While the significance of these transitional habitats to breeding birds is well known, increasing evidence suggests they are important during the postfledg-ing/premigratory and migratory periods, not only for shrub-nesting species but also for many species that breed in late-succes-sional habitats. Additionally, a number of studies suggests exotic species have the potential to alter habitat quality, in turn affecting the fitness of migratory landbirds. The purpose of this study was to evaluate

Volume 36 (2) 31

etc.) and a second, more detailed ranger perception survey incorporating in-depth interviews. It is hoped that this large data set will influence and improve government policy towards rangers and their working conditions.

Corvids Sustaining ForestsPetaluma, CA, USA (Feb 3)—A review in The Condor: Ornithological Applications explores how oaks and pines depend on corvids, the group of birds that includes ravens, crows, and jays, to reproduce and spread—and how birds may be the key to helping these valuable trees weather the

challenges of habitat fragmentation and climate change.

Corvids store seeds in small caches spread across the landscape, a behavior called “scatter-hoarding.” Birds cache more seeds than they eat, so some sprout, help-ing trees colonize new areas. Many oaks and pines have adaptations to encourage dispersal by birds, producing large, nutri-tious seeds with protective chemicals that keep them from rotting, which encourages scatter-hoarding by eliminating the need for animals to eat the seeds immediately.

The Review by Mario Pesendorfer of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and his colleagues at the Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center, Cornell Lab of Ornithology,

and The Nature Conservancy explore spe-cific examples of such relationships from around the world. In Europe, Eurasian jays are proving to be a crucial ally for oaks as habitat fragmentation and climate change increasingly impact European hardwoods. In the western US, researchers have shown that repeated long-distance dispersal events by Clark’s nutcrackers are essential to establish and maintain Ponderosa pine populations and that Pinyon jays help maintain the tree’s genetic diversity. In the eastern US, blue jays speed forest fire recovery by increasing their caching effort after fires and selecting canopy gaps as cache sites.

Harnessing this bird behavior may aid habitat restora-tion. Europeans have been aware of the relation-ship between jays and oaks for centuries, and managers in some areas of western Europe a re plant ing sma l l stands of seed-source trees and rely-ing on corvids to help disperse them across the landscape. In America, con-

servationists are exploring the possibility of reintroducing Channel Island scrub jays to islands where they were extirpated to speed the recovery of oak and pine vegetation after livestock removal.

“In light of the globally changing climate and increasing habitat fragmenta-tion, these winged dispersers that transport seeds over long distances are likely to become more important, as they enable plant populations to shift their range,” says Pesendorfer. “Since oaks and pines are important keystone species that themselves provide habitat for hundreds of animal species, such dispersal can have ecosystem-wide benefits.” n

NewsCONTINUED FROM PAGE 6

fitness correlates associated with migrant use of shrubland habitat dominated by nonnative honeysuckle (Lonicera spp.) in order to gauge habitat quality for spring migrants using an inland stopover site in northeastern Pennsylvania. We used esti-mates of mass change as our fitness indica-tor, with positive mass change indicating quality habitat. Our results suggest most birds gain mass while using honeysuckle-dominated habitat and many species, including species that characteristically breed in forested habitats, accrue fitness advantages from using shrubland habitat during spring stopover in northeastern Pennsylvania. However, we emphasize the need to examine the cumulative effects of exotic vegetation through multiple stages of the avian annual cycle to better under-stand the fitness consequences of nonna-tive vegetation on migratory landbirds.

Unpredictable environments lead to the evolution of parental neglect in birds

SM Caro, AS Griffin, CA Hinde, and SA West. Nature Communications 7. 2016 March 29;Article 10985. doi:10.1038/ncomms10985

A nest of begging chicks invites an intui-tive explanation: needy chicks want to be fed and parents want to feed them. Sur-prisingly, however, in a quarter of species studied, parents ignore begging chicks. Furthermore, parents in some species even neglect smaller chicks that beg more, and preferentially feed the biggest chicks that beg less. This extreme variation across spe-cies, which contradicts predictions from theory, represents a major outstanding problem for the study of animal signalling. We analyse parent–offspring communica-tion across 143 bird species, and show that this variation correlates with ecological dif-ferences. In predictable and good environ-ments, chicks in worse condition beg more, and parents preferentially feed those chicks. In unpredictable and poor environments, parents pay less attention to begging, and instead rely on size cues or structural signals of quality. Overall, these results show how ecological variation can lead to different signalling systems being evolutionarily stable in different species.

Volume 36 (2) 31

Eurasian jay (Garrulus glandarius glandarius), a corvid found to have a crucial role in the preservation of European oaks.PHOTO © LUC VIATOUR. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 LICENSE.

http://eol.org/data_objects/31924569


Causes of stranding and mortality, and final disposition of logger-head sea turtles (Caretta caretta) admitted to a wildlife rehabilita-tion center in Gran Canaria Island, Spain (1998–2014): a long-term retrospective studyJ Orós, N Montesdeoca, M Camacho, A Aren-cibia, P Calabuig. PLOS One. 2016 Feb. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149398

Aims: The aims of this study were to analyze the causes of stranding of 1,860 loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta) admit-ted at the Tafira Wildlife Rehabilitation Center in Gran Canaria Island, Spain, from 1998 to 2014, and to analyze the outcomes of the rehabilitation process to allow meaningful auditing of its quality.

gear and/or plastics (50.81%), unknown/undetermined (20.37%), and ingestion of hooks (11.88%). The final disposition of the 1,634 loggerhead turtles admitted alive were: Er = 3.37%, Mr = 10.34%, and Rr = 86.29%. Er was significantly higher in the trauma category (18.67%) compared to the other causes of admission. The high-est Mr was observed for turtles admitted due to trauma (30.67%). The highest Rr was observed in the crude oil (93.87%) and entanglement (92.38%) categories. The median Tr ranged from 12 days (unknown) to 70 days (trauma).

Conclusions: This survey is the first large-scale epidemiological study on causes of stranding and mortality of Eastern

Effects of “Swim with the Turtles” tourist attractions on green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) health in Barbados, West Indies

K Stewart, T Norton, H Mohammed, D Browne, K Clements, et al. Journal of Wildlife Diseases. 2016;52(S104–S117).

Along the West Coast of Barbados, a unique relationship has developed between endangered green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas) and humans. Fishermen began inadvertently provisioning these forag-ing turtles with fish offal discarded from their boats. Although initially an indirect supplementation, this activity became a popular attraction for visitors. Subse-quently, demand for this activity increased, and direct supplementation or provision-ing with food began. Food items offered included raw whole fish (typically a mix-ture of false herring [Harengula clupeola] and pilchard [Harengula humeralis]), fil-leted fish, and lesser amounts of processed food such as hot dogs, chicken, bread, or various other leftovers. Alterations in behavior and growth rates as a result of the provisioning have been documented in this population. The purpose of this study was to determine how tourism-based human interactions are affecting the overall health of this foraging population and to deter-mine what potential health risks these interactions may create for sea turtles. Juve-nile green sea turtles (n = 29) were captured from four sites off the coast of Barbados, West Indies, and categorized into a group that received supplemental feeding as part of a tour (n = 11) or an unsupplemented group (n = 18) that consisted of individu-als captured at sites that did not provide supplemental feeding. Following capture, a general health assessment of each animal was conducted. This included weight and morphometric measurements, a systematic physical examination, determination of body condition score and body condition index, epibiota assessment and quantifi-cation, and clinical pathology including hematologic and biochemical testing and nutritional assessments. The supplemented group was found to have changes to body condition, vitamin, mineral, hematologic, and biochemical values. Based on these

Juvenile loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) collected from surface habitat in a research study.

PHO

TO ©

FWC

FIS

H &

WIL

DLI

FE R

ESEA

RCH

INST

ITU

TE. C

C B

Y-N

C-N

D 2

.0 L

ICEN

SE.

Atlantic loggerheads and demonstrates that at least 71.72% of turtles stranded due to anthropogenic causes. The high Rr (86.29%) emphasizes the importance of marine rehabilitation centers for con-servation purposes. The stratified analysis by causes of admission of the three final disposition rates, and the parameters Td and Tr should be included in the outcome research of the rehabilitation process of sea turtles in order to allow comparative stud-ies among marine rehabilitation centers around the world.

Methods: Primary causes of morbid-ity were classified into seven categories: entanglement in fishing gear and/or plas-tics, ingestion of hooks and monofilament lines, trauma, infectious disease, crude oil, other causes, and unknown/undeter-mined. Final dispositions were calculated as euthanasia (Er), unassisted mortality (Mr), and release (Rr) rates. Time to death (Td) for euthanized and dead turtles, and length of stay for released (Tr) turtles, were evaluated.

Results: The most frequent causes of morbidity were entanglement in fishing

https://www.flickr.com/photos/myfwc/23062634945/in/photolist-B8Y2SZ-nKPCUz-HyGwkw-5VsG9o-a78ku9-4attV4-5yScrP-2DHazv-6vk5hR-nSR3qi-9vJ4vA-484yGC-nG6xFV-72jBih-4Soqch-5haGN-bw285E-cJoMTj-47ZxXg-nG5Nbb-9tiJhN-3Uz9Yj-6pRtuP-9tiJCJ-y3QvP-2gpvco-3UuPUT-9tfMjB-47Zxoe-7N5eU-btFckM-6vWovn-y3Qvq-6pRtHD-4ir6tt-y3Qvy-bbpHZ6-6Wjjw8-6pVC9Q-r7DdB-7LpQzd-GMDDZC-9oAB89-fvynD6-cBdmA5-pdhPjE-pbKo84-9jCUhK-nUwaNY-4atCPX

Volume 36 (2) 33

results, recommendations were made to decrease negative behaviors and health impacts for turtles as a result of this pro-visioning.

White-nose syndrome survivors do not exhibit frequent arousals associated with Pseudogymno-ascus destructans infectionTM Lilley, JS Johnson, L Ruokolainen, EJ Rogers, CA Wilson, et al. Frontiers in Zoology. 2016 Mar;13(12).

Background: White-nose syndrome (WNS) has devastated bat populations in North America, with millions of bats dead. WNS is associated with physiologi-cal changes in hibernating bats, leading to increased arousals from hibernation and premature consumption of fat reserves. However, there is evidence of surviving populations of little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus) close to where the fungus was first detected nearly ten years ago.Results: We examined the hibernation patterns of a surviving population of little brown myotis and compared them to patterns in populations before the arrival of WNS and populations at the peak of WNS mortality. Despite infection with Pseudogymnoascus destructans, the causative fungal agent, the remnant population dis-played less frequent arousals from torpor and lower torpid body temperatures than did bats that died from WNS during the peak of mortality. The hibernation patterns of the remnant population resembled pre-WNS patterns with some modifications.Conclusions: These data show that rem-nant populations of little brown myotis do not experience the increase in periodic arousals from hibernation typified by bats dying from WNS, despite the presence of the fungal pathogen on their skin. These patterns may reflect the use of colder hiber-nacula microclimates by WNS survivors, and/or may reflect differences in how these bats respond to the disease.

Assessment of the rates of injury and mortality in waterfowl cap-tured with five methods of capture and techniques for minimizing risksMF O’Brien, R Lee, R Cromie, and MJ Brown. Journal of Wildlife Diseases. 2016;52(S86-S95)

Swan pipes, duck decoys, cage traps, can-non netting, and roundups are widely used to capture waterfowl in order to monitor populations. These methods are often regulated in countries with national ring-ing or banding programs and are consid-ered to be safe and, thus, justifiable given the benefits to conservation. However, few published studies have addressed how frequently injuries and mortalities occur, or the nature of any injuries. In the present study, rates of mortality and injury during captures with the use of these meth-ods carried out by the Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust as part of conser-vation programs were a s se ssed. The total rate of injury (including mild dermal abra-sions) was 0.42% across all species groups, whereas tota l morta lity was 0.1% across all capture methods. Incidence of injury varied among spe-cies groups (ducks, geese, swans, and rails), with some, for example, dabbling ducks, at greater risk than others. We also describe techniques used before, during, and after a capture to reduce stress and injury in captured waterfowl. Projects using these or other capture methods should monitor and publish their performance to allow sharing of experience and to reduce risks further.

Association between positive canine heartworm (Dirofilaria im-mitis) antigen results and presence of Acanthocheilonema odendhali microfilaria in California sea lions (Zalophus californianus)DDR Krucik, W Van Bonn and SP John-son. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine. 2016;47(1):25-28.

This study establishes a relationship between positive canine heartworm (Dirofilaria immitis) test results frequently observed in California sea lions (Zalophus

californianus) and infection with the filarid nematode Acanthocheilonema odendhali. Four commercially available canine heart-worm antigen tests were evaluated for cross-reaction with A. odendhali in Califor-nia sea lions. Sera were tested from fifteen California sea lions with A. odendhali-associated microfilaremia, confirmed by blood smear, and with no evidence of D. immitis infection at necropsy. Ninety-five percent of tests were falsely positive for D. immitis. This study also determined that

the prevalence of A. odendhali infection in stranded California sea lions from central California is approximately 23% by com-paring the number of findings of micro-filaremia to the total number of California sea lions sampled at The Marine Mammal Center between 2005 and 2011, inclusive. Acanthocheilonema odenhali microfilaremia in California sea lions is likely to cross-react with canine heartworm antigen tests, and clinicians should interpret results with caution.

Animal migration: Dispersion explains declinesRA Fuller. Nature. 2016 Mar 24;531(451–452).

Migratory birds are declining globally. A broad study of European migratory birds finds that species that disperse widely dur-ing the non-breeding season are less likely to be in decline than are species with more restricted dispersion. n

PHO

TO ©

ALA

SKA

RFEGIO

N U

SF&W

S. CC

BY-NC

-ND

2.0 LICEN

SE.

USF&W banding a spectacled eider female goose on the Yukon Delta NWR in Alaska.

Volume 36 (2) 33

https://www.flickr.com/photos/usfws_alaska/8726588398/in/photolist-ei93GE-eafKvR-rUAs7m-54xQUU-rUDd7F-FyzDZ8-rJFLvi-t2i5Rn-GwuNkn-rCgsvZ-o9kz4y-dehw4o-kY7AnR-dehvNo-dehviU-6geNHe-kY6Y5x-pRHWNw-kY8noJ-duGHJ9-orhNtt-kY6SBi-kwYFTs-duEu5j-7XAwNC-at7DQk-kwX3fx-duzyRV-duzXzt-at733x-duAXwX-FD4Xbd-FFo6TV-9wghWV-ERZBSn-duzrjp-o9PcUk-opfqdy-qBaqJ4-kXdrHS-ei8h1d-kY8pwm-kY8rkm-opfmcC-kY7yJR-orgcsA-or12uZ-dekSsj-ei2Ay4-HpcCR


Okay, so the quad shot latte may be too much for me.

TAIL END

Hooded merganser (Lophodytes cucullatus).PHOTO © NIGEL, FLICKR.COM. CC BY 2.0.

http://www.starpathimages.com/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/geezaweezer/16089096376/in/faves-9508523@N04/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/geezaweezer/16089096376/in/faves-9508523@N04/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/winnu/7265920736/in/photolist-c32JSm-brw5Fx-7bYKgq-c3jeiY-c1Ymmb-c1Ysj7-bZWwRb-bqmw64-aeQLdS-bvBt5V-7MkUeL-dhhhKB-c4ngSw-aeYEZx-c54K6s

Volume 36 (2) 35

INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS

POLICY Original manuscripts on a variety of wildlife rehabilita-tion topics (e.g., husbandry and veterinary medicine) are wel-comed. Manuscripts that address related topics such as facility administration, public relations, law, and education are invited as well.

Associate editors and anonymous reviewers, appropriate to the subject matter, evaluate each submitted manuscript. Concur-rent submission to other peer-reviewed journals will preclude publication in the Journal of Wildlife Rehabilitation (JWR). The International Wildlife Rehabilitation Council (IWRC) retains copyright on all original articles published in the JWR but, upon request, will grant permission to reprint articles with credit given to the IWRC–JWR.

SUBMISSIONS All submissions should be accompanied by a cover letter stating the intent of the author(s) to submit the manuscript exclusively for publication in the JWR. Electronic submissions are required; hard-copy manuscripts are not accepted. The manuscript file should be attached to the submission letter (which can be the body of your email) and sent to:

Kieran Lindsey, Editor

[email protected]

MANUSCRIPT Manuscripts should be MS Word documents in either PC or MAC platform (no PDF files).

Manuscript should be typed in Times Roman, 12 pt., double-spaced throughout with one-inch margins.

Include the name of each author. Specify the corresponding au-thor and provide affiliation, complete mailing address, and email address. The affiliation for all authors should be included in a brief (maximum of 100 words) biography for each that reflects profes-sional experience related to rehabilitation or to the manuscript subject matter rather than personal information. Biographies may be edited due to space limitations.

Include an abstract that does not exceed 175 words and choose several (up to 14) key words.

Templates have been developed for the following submission categories: case study, technique (including diets), research, and literature review; authors may request a copy of one, or all, of these templates from the editor ([email protected]) before developing a manuscript for submission to the JWR.

STYLE The JWR follows the Scientific Style and Format of the CSE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers, 8th Edition. The complete “JWR Author Instructions” document is available at:

http://theiwrc.org/journal-of-wildlife-rehabilitation/ jwr-submission-guidelines

or by email request to the Editor. This document provides for-matting guidelines for in-text citations and the Literature Cited section; provides the JWR textual requirements for tables, figures, and photo captions; and describes quality and resolution needs for charts, graphs, photographs, and illustrations.

Young male fallow deer (Dama dama) with still-growing antlers in velvet.PHOTO ©ANDY MORFFEW. CC BY-ND 2.0 LICENSE.

http://http://www.andymorffew.com/

International Wildlife Rehabilitation Council

PO Box 3197Eugene, OR 97403 USAVoice/Fax: 408.876.6153Toll free: 866.871.1869

Email: [email protected]

Providing science-based education and

resources on wildlife rehabilitation

to promote wildlife conservation and

welfare worldwide.




INTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE REHABILITATION COUNCIL Volume …2)F.pdf · public concerns over animal welfare. “These two organizations have been long-time adversaries, but we’re excited

Documents